Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(ASCEND) Re: Some food for thought from the boys at ASCEND
On Thu, 12 Mar 1998 23:57:15 -0600 (CST), Jeff <jhupp@gensys.com>
wrote:
> Well yes Bill, that was obvious from the Draft.
> The 'dirty little secret' is that the 'digital' modems in the ascend
>boxes have about 80% the valid session / connection attempt rate that the
>'analog' modems in the same boxes do.
Which further underscores what I posted in a prior message; all the
clamouring for and hullabaloo about veedot ninety notwithstanding, I
don't think I want any new code or any new hardware from anyone for my
central site RAS equipment. What I have works. Moreover, my users
are happy. Sure, they're asking about 56k, but only in the context of
proposed purchases of new modems. No one wants to buy old technology.
But unlike most situations, we enjoy 99% control over what the client
purchases and ultimately calls into us with. Ergo we don't recommend
and further refuse to purchase for them (and adamantly REFUSE to
support) those "Radio Shack Baby Intercom" lookalike modems with TI
chipsets.
Will we upgrade to V.90? Sure we will, but not until the product and
protocol gains some maturity. Our shop does not operate on the
bleeding edge of sword. We've had our Maxens a bit over a year now
and so far only flashed new firmware into them twice, both times
because there was a valid reason to do so. We did put MX-SL-12MOD-S56
modem cards in them, but being in full control of the client side
purchases dodges any possible issues there. Perhaps our host modems
are not fully compliant and perhaps there's better code, but what we
have works perfectly, perhaps one could even say flawlessly.
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>